In response to MattyScornD's comment:

British territory.

To find a Palestine run by Palistinians, you'd have to go back a few centuries...

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

In response to MattyScornD's comment:

British territory. Before that, part of the Ottoman empire.

To find a Palestine run by Palistinians, you'd have to go back several centuries...

One of the few things I agree with Butler on.

Israel is not doing itself any favors by building settlements without the main issue being resolved. A two state solution is likely the best pragmatic result.

But the self-appointed "Palestinians" (arabs that no other country in the region wants any part of) are rather largely responsible for getting themselves in to the present situation.

Their newly formed PLO was already launching terrorist attacks before four arab countries made the mistake of attacking Israel. Well, one of the things that often happens when an aggressor loses the war it has launched...happened....    Israel seized the gaza strip.

And now you've got a loosely assorted group of arabs that, for some reason, no other country wants calling themselves "Palestinians," claiming to be dispossessed of a land they hadn't possessed for centuries and centuries....and which they might not have lost had it not been used to attack Israel.

 

In response to Nasser's comment.

And an awful lot of them still mean it. Israel, being the only real democracy and our only serious ally in the region, could do with some protection.

I like that the GOP strongly supports Israel, and it really bothers me to hear many on the left start screaming about "aparthied" and "occupation," completely ignoring the history that brought the situation to the present.

See the thing about aparthied....        blacks weren't chanting "death to whites," black terrorist groups didn't murder tens of thousands of whites, white south africa was not surrounded by more black nations, all of whom repeatedly stated over the decades that they wish for white south africa to be destroyed. Other black nations did not fund terrorist groups to attack white south africa.

So as for who is more extreme on the question of Israel, I think it is plainly the Democrats.

 

 

 

Of course Mexicans have a right to live in the southwest US, many do. All we're saying is that they need to follow the rules of immigration as set in law by the federal government.

Of course both Jews and Arabs have a right to live in Israel, many do. We're just saying that they need to believe that Israel has a right to exist as an independent country and not just as dhmmis.

In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

???

Of course they do. Thing is they haven't killed and maimed tens and thousands of Americans in those cities over the last few decades in a bid to take them over (or simply "destroy them").

I also don't hear many Mexicans chanting "death to Americans!"

In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

Well, way off topic, but...

There are movements that are similar to Hama and Hezzbollah operating in such a way to retake the southwest.  La Raza, for example.

In response to skeeter20's comment:

NO...!!!  

There isn't anything remotely CLOSE to Hamas and Hezbollah in the U.S....

...and it's utterly irresponsible and outrageous of you to say so.

 

Puto.

 

 

In response to StalkingButler's comment:

That's an awfully broad brush with which to paint the palestinian topic.  If anyone said the same about jews or christians, they would be roundly vilified as anti-semitic, etc., and worse.  Hagel's gop opposition are hypocritical in this regard.

Now, if you said the same about fundamentalist jihadism, I might be able to agree, but we both know that's not the same thing, even if you've forgotten.

[And accusing Islam of anti-science views is downright laughable (and contra islamic history, too) in the face of both catholic and christian dogma re: evolution, neuro-biology, geology, physics, etc.]

 

In response to skeeter20's comment:

And what, pray tell, makes Hagel a "RINO" (in your uniquely jaundiced view)...?

Even if he is, why is that alone a reason to disqualify his nomination...??  To what purpose?